On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 10:45:06AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 12.10.22 10:41, Noel Butler wrote: > > or save SA doing extra work, and use the RBL's at MTA level - where they > > should be used and have been used for 25 years in the ISP world > > you compare uncomparable. > > SA does header scanning and can check on non-direct headers, e.g. at the > internal network level. > Also, it can do deep header scanning for open proxies etc.
Also, many uses of RBL (e.g. amavis) do not take them as "absolute truth" to outright refuse to accept mail, but only as additional clues to programatically increase or decrease spam score by some amount (different score depending on the RBL, what other rules matched in addition to RBL etc) and maybe to autolearn to stop same spam from other IPs which are not yet blacklisted (and report them to RBLs too). Which is much higher functionality than "this RBL said this IP is bad, so reject everything from there, regardless if it is good or bad". I have lots of free CPU cycles to burn, but I do NOT have human hours to deal with questions like "where is my mail?" when RBL yields false positive (Your mail is either in your INBOX, or in your SPAMBOX). -- Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.
